The whole book of Psalms is called, in Hebrew, the Book of Praises (Sefer Tehillim). Not all the Psalms are praise songs. Some are cries of distress. But the book is called the Book of Praises because its many psalms meet us in our present experiences, whatever they are, and invariably point our hearts toward God’s victories—realized or promised. Indeed, the whole Psalter reaches its climax with a “new song” (Ps. 149) and a “hallelujah” benediction (Ps. 150). Until that great day comes when all our tears will be wiped away and we will sing only “new song” praises (Rev. 5:9; 14:3), the variety of songs in the Psalter tune our hearts to that joy now. It is for this reason that the Psalter is called the Book of Praises, and this book about singing those ancient songs is called Sing a New Song.

Joel R. Beeke and Anthony Selvaggio, Sing a New Song: Recovering Psalm Singing for the Twenty-First Century, Loc. 91.

Five psalms in the Psalter are called “new songs” (Pss. 33:3; 40:3; 96:1; 98:1; 149:1). Additionally, while Psalm 144 is not itself a “new song,” it includes a promise to sing a “new song” (v. 9) after God grants a longed-for victory. In biblical Hebrew, a new song is not necessarily a song that was recently written. The phrase is an idiom for a certain kind of praise song—the kind of praise one sings loudly for all the nations to hear after God has granted a great victory. Psalm 40 is a good example: “I waited patiently for the LORD; and he inclined unto me, and heard my cry. He brought me up also out of an horrible pit, out of the miry clay, and set my feet upon a rock, and established my goings. And he hath put a new song in my mouth, even praise unto our God: many shall see it, and fear, and shall trust in the LORD” (vv. 1–3, emphasis added).

Joel R. Beeke, Anthony Selvaggio, Sing a New Song: Recovering Psalm Singing for the Twenty-First Century, Loc. 83

The compiler who put Kings together for posterity above all sought to provide an account of the nation’s history and an explanation of why that history took the course it finally did.

Robert Alter, Ancient Israel – The Former Prophets: Joshua, Judges, Samuel, and Kings – A Translation with Commentary, 594.

The narrator links the beginning of the temple-building with Israel’s exodus from Egypt (6:1), suggesting that all Israel’s history so far has been leading up to this point (cf. Exod. 15:13-17). From now on Israel is to be known as the nation which worships YHWH in this temple. If David’s bringing up the ark to Zion set the seal on his rise to kindship, then Solomon’s building of the temple confirms YHWH’s choice of David’s line. As Meyers notes (pp. 360-2), the temple is a visual symbol of the legitimacy of David’s dynasty. It represents a stable social order in which the king enjoys divine favour and upholds justice. In Kings, as in ancient Near Eastern thought generally, the political and the religious are indivisible.

Philip E. Satterthwaite & J. Gordon McConville, Exploring the Old Testament: A Guide to the Historical Books, 150.

Israel’s political, military, and economic prowess was, however, only a veneer covering the rottenness of social, cultural, and spiritual institutions in Solomon’s latter years. The records univocally attest to the essential righteousness and morality of both king and kingdom at the beginning, but they are equally in agreement that the picture had radically changed forty years later.

Eugene H. Merrill, Kingdom of Priests: A History of Old Testament Israel, 310-311.

The purpose of the compiler [of First and Second Kings] was definitely didactic: (1) He judged every king by his conformity or nonconformity to the law of God, especially to the Deuteronomic law of centralized worship. (2) He taught that sin inevitably brings punishment, and faith and righteousness ultimately triumph. (3) He showed an appreciation of the need for social reform, notably in his treatment of Rehoboam and Elijah.

Clyde T. Francisco, Introducing the Old Testament (rev. ed.), 126.

1Cor. 13:1 ¶ If I speak in the tongues of mortals and of angels, but do not have love, I am a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal. 2 And if I have prophetic powers, and understand all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have all faith, so as to remove mountains, but do not have love, I am nothing. 3 If I give away all my possessions, and if I hand over my body so that I may boast, but do not have love, I gain nothing.

Jer. 17:9 The heart is devious above all else; it is perverse— who can understand it?

Phil. 2:1 ¶ If then there is any encouragement in Christ, any consolation from love, any sharing in the Spirit, any compassion and sympathy, 2 make my joy complete: be of the same mind, having the same love, being in full accord and of one mind. 3 Do nothing from selfish ambition or conceit, but in humility regard others as better than yourselves. 4 Let each of you look not to your own interests, but to the interests of others.

Rom. 12:15 Rejoice with those who rejoice, weep with those who weep.

Between verses 15 and 16 [in Matthew 3] two Latin manuscripts . . . describe the baptism of Jesus as follows . . . (“And when Jesus was being baptized a great light flashed (a tremendous light flashed around) from the water, so that all who had gathered there were afraid”). According to Isho’dad of Merv (ninth century) and Dionysius Barsalibi (twelfth century), Tatian’s Diatessaron also contained a reference to the light. The passage from Isho’dad’s Commentary on the Gospels is as follows:

“And straightway, as the Diatessaron testifies, a great light shown, and the Jordan was surrounded by white clouds, and many troops of spiritual beings were seen singing praises in the air; and the Jordan stood still quietly from its course, its waters not being troubled, and a scent of perfumes wafted from thence; for the Heavens were opened” (M. D. Gibson’s translation, p. 27).

How much of this extract should be regarded as Tatianic, and how much may have been taken from other sources (perhaps an early hymn), is not known, but it is thought that, in view of Ephraem’s remark about “the shining of the light upon the waters” (Com. iv.5), at least the reference to the light on the Jordan was present in the Diatessaron.

Several other writers refer to the tradition of the light, including Justin Martyr, who says that after Jesus had gone down into the water “a fire kindled in the Jordan” (. . . Dial. c. Tryph. 88), and Epiphanius, after the voice came from heaven, “immediately a great light shone around the place” (. . . Panarion haer. xxx, xiii, 7).

Bruce M. Metzger, A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament, 10.

There is a type of sociology and, certainly, a high degree of marketability that has helped to formulate a narrative around gold ownership. People loving feeling prepared for disasters, and they certainly love sounding like they are prepared. Fearmongering newsletters and commercials that sell anxiety around threats and catastrophes do not need to provide historical data or empirical support for the conclusions that they offer; indeed, their conclusion is rather transparent, “buy something [gold] from me!” Sales pitches are not expected to be thorough economic analysis, let alone rooted in objectivity.

David Bahnsen, The Case for Dividend Growth, 87.

What false idea is common today about the end or purpose of God’s providence? Today many people say they want to believe in a “democratic God” who does things, not for his own glory, but for the benefit of the majority of his creatures, or for the greatest good of the greatest number.

What should we think of this idea of a “democratic God”? (a) It is contrary to the doctrine of God revealed in the Bible. (b) It is idolatry, for it sets up a god made in man’s image as the object of worship. (c) It overlooks the truth that the glory of God includes the welfare of his creatures in general; not the welfare of all his creatures individually, but of his creatures generally. The non-theistic viewpoint that is dominant in the world today makes the welfare of the creatures, or of humanity, the end or purpose of all things. The theistic viewpoint of the Bible, on the contrary, regards the glory of God as the great end or purpose of all things. According to the Bible, the welfare of the creatures (including humanity) is not the main thing, but rather the by-product of the glorification of God.

J. G. Vos, The Westminster Larger Catechism Commentary, ed. G. I. Williamson, 46.